Cabalamat blogs on The Pirate Party blog about the case of Edwyn Collins - who was barred by MySpace from uploading his own music because he didn't own the copyright - but he does. The story was also covered in the Guardian but origininates from Edwin's wife and manager Grace on the blog on Edwyn's MySpace page..
According to the Guardian the villians of the piece are Warner Music group - who have been contacted by Grace but months later failed to resolve things.. (It's nowhere explained if Edwyn also owns the copyright on his recordings..) The savvy Grace also comments "Warner's were one of the lead petitioners in the attempt to put those three stoner lads in Sweden in prison recently, remember."
What the Guardian doesn't mention (nor Cabalamat for that matter) is that Grace's original blog post is a response to the Featured Artist Coalition's "Air statement". This statement of support for Lily Allen also includes this curious statement:
"Our meeting also voted overwhelmingly to support a three-strike sanction on those who persistently download illegal files, sanctions to consist of a warning letter, a stronger warning letter and a final sanction of the restriction of the infringer’s bandwidth to a level which would render file-sharing of media files impractical while leaving basic email and web access functional."
They are trying to play the nice guy by stopping short of an outright ban - but it misses the point.... Leaving aside whether file-sharing for non commercial use should in fact be an offence -
If you commit a crime in the street you are not banned from the street, if you rob a bank you are not banned from banks, and if you commit a crime on the internet you should not be banned from the internet. Moreover, a group punishment - affecting anyone in a household - is inherently unjust.
Besides which.... What level of bandwidth stops you downloading a 3Mbyte .mp3 but let's you happily surf around bandwidth hungry websites?
So basically FAC. Your position sucks.
Grace hits the point...
"The gig's up. You might as well take a position about when you want the sun to come up in the morning. It's over. Now let's get on with working out a wonderful new way for music lovers to enjoy music for free or for a small subscription that makes it legal and easy to hear ANYTHING and allows the artist to reap the rewards of such freedom of access. Viva la revolucion! "
Edwyn ROCKS!.. and get's my best wishes...
Piratpartiet & The Pirate Party - Working for copyright reform
Thursday, 8 October 2009
Wednesday, 7 October 2009
Don't read me, read this
For up to date and informed information on what's happening across the pond with the Patriot Act check out Julian Sanchez' blog.. covering "the intersection of privacy, technology, and politics".
Latest entries include this video fact check on Fox News reporting on Patriot reforms, and a great round-up of the state of play - which is not so great....
(Discovered through Privacy Digest)
Julian also blogs on this topic at Cato on Liberty.
Piratpartiet & The Pirate Party - Putting Privacy first.
Latest entries include this video fact check on Fox News reporting on Patriot reforms, and a great round-up of the state of play - which is not so great....
(Discovered through Privacy Digest)
Julian also blogs on this topic at Cato on Liberty.
Piratpartiet & The Pirate Party - Putting Privacy first.
Tuesday, 6 October 2009
FRA, 138, Drowning dogs and heavy British Boots...
It's an interesting week in parliament this week... at least for those with an eye for justice and individual rights and privacy.
In Sweden the FRA legislation (that means state monitoring of all international traffic (voice, mail, sms, email etc) passing Swedens borders is up for review. It's already on the statute book.. but all it needs is four MPs from the ruling alliance to vote against, or eight to abstain and the law will be torn up. The stakes are high... not least as it will be a hot topic for next year's parliamentary elections if the opposition don't succeed in getting it stopped.
Meanwhile, over at the EU discussions on the Telecom Package and the famous amendment 138 come to a head tomorrow with another meeting between ministers and the parliamentary representatives (Piratpartiets MEP Christian Engström among them). Much to the disgust of the Green group the parliamentary delegation have already agreed not to press ministers on other areas like net neutrality, but still they still want to see the parliaments proposals implemneted - making judicial review a necessary condition for disconnecting people from the Internet. 'Innocent until proven guilty' doesn't sound like such a controversial position now does it?
I've been impressed by the degree of communication both of the issues and the process and progress in the Swedish blogosphere - not least from pirates HAX, Christian and Rick. Communication even when the Council of Minister's hide their negotiating position behind a 'Confidential' stamp.
Latest from HAX is a report on how the British have been lobbying Eva-Britt Svensson - a left wing MEP - to support their position on cutting people off from the internet without trial. Apparently, according to the Brits it's all a question of child pornography. Eva-Britt, feminist, and chairman of the equality working party, doesn't agree....
"..it's instead the possibility for powerful capitalist interests within principally the entertainment industry to drive enforcement work, and through Internet suppliers stop those that are copying music and games on the web through e.g The Pirate Bay and similar search engines. It's all about putting a stop to consumption of culture by those that can't or don't believe they can afford the prices that the industry decides."
If I can steal a quote...
"When you want to drown a dog you say it has rabies."
Jean-Pierre Brard (Parti Communiste Français)
...from the French parliamentary debate on 'HADOPI 2' when the French justice minister started to talk about child pornography.
Update: the vote on FRA is in fact next week, weds Oct 14th.
In Sweden the FRA legislation (that means state monitoring of all international traffic (voice, mail, sms, email etc) passing Swedens borders is up for review. It's already on the statute book.. but all it needs is four MPs from the ruling alliance to vote against, or eight to abstain and the law will be torn up. The stakes are high... not least as it will be a hot topic for next year's parliamentary elections if the opposition don't succeed in getting it stopped.
Meanwhile, over at the EU discussions on the Telecom Package and the famous amendment 138 come to a head tomorrow with another meeting between ministers and the parliamentary representatives (Piratpartiets MEP Christian Engström among them). Much to the disgust of the Green group the parliamentary delegation have already agreed not to press ministers on other areas like net neutrality, but still they still want to see the parliaments proposals implemneted - making judicial review a necessary condition for disconnecting people from the Internet. 'Innocent until proven guilty' doesn't sound like such a controversial position now does it?
I've been impressed by the degree of communication both of the issues and the process and progress in the Swedish blogosphere - not least from pirates HAX, Christian and Rick. Communication even when the Council of Minister's hide their negotiating position behind a 'Confidential' stamp.
Latest from HAX is a report on how the British have been lobbying Eva-Britt Svensson - a left wing MEP - to support their position on cutting people off from the internet without trial. Apparently, according to the Brits it's all a question of child pornography. Eva-Britt, feminist, and chairman of the equality working party, doesn't agree....
"..it's instead the possibility for powerful capitalist interests within principally the entertainment industry to drive enforcement work, and through Internet suppliers stop those that are copying music and games on the web through e.g The Pirate Bay and similar search engines. It's all about putting a stop to consumption of culture by those that can't or don't believe they can afford the prices that the industry decides."
If I can steal a quote...
"When you want to drown a dog you say it has rabies."
Jean-Pierre Brard (Parti Communiste Français)
...from the French parliamentary debate on 'HADOPI 2' when the French justice minister started to talk about child pornography.
Update: the vote on FRA is in fact next week, weds Oct 14th.
Human Rights - Churchills legacy
"Conservative parliamentary candidate Jesse Norman and political columnist Peter Oborne today launch ‘Churchill’s Legacy: The Conservative case for the Human Rights Act’. The short book, published by Liberty in support of the Common Values campaign, recommends that the Conservatives reclaim their historic position as a party of British liberty and the rule of law by dropping their opposition to the Human Rights Act."
Liberty issued a press release yesterday announcing this new book -which also includes a synopsys of the arguments contained in the book. Interesting to see the Conservatives moving towards a more humanitarian position. The site also has a link to the book in .pdf . I could link to it but then you'd never go look at what else you can find at Liberty now would you..?
Liberty issued a press release yesterday announcing this new book -which also includes a synopsys of the arguments contained in the book. Interesting to see the Conservatives moving towards a more humanitarian position. The site also has a link to the book in .pdf . I could link to it but then you'd never go look at what else you can find at Liberty now would you..?
Redefining piracy
Christian Engström, Piratpartiet's MEP reports on proceedings at JURI, the EU committee on legal affairs, who have been debating counterfeiting and piracy - specifically this document:
Enhancing the enforcement of intellectual property rights in the internal market
- which contains plans to set up an 'observatory' on counterfeiting and piracy.
It's an initiative that PP blogger Mikael Nilsson describes as "a comprehensive campaign to, together with the copyright industry, find the best methods to chase and brainwash the population"
Christian, who sits on JURI as part of his work at the EU parliament, took the chance at the meeting to point out that counterfeiting and piracy are not at all the same thing - and that piracy is is not a judicial term and they in fact mean copyright infringement.
He's only partly right since (maritime) piracy is defined in the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) of 1982 as "any criminal acts of violence, detention, or depredation committed for private ends by the crew or the passengers of a private ship or aircraft that is directed on the high seas against another ship, aircraft, or against persons or property on board a ship or aircraft." (It must be true... Wikipedia says so...). ..which begs the question what does that have to do with intellectual property and copyright?
Christian's point though is that lumping non-commercial file sharing, which Piratpartiet wants to legalise, with counterfeiting, which we don't, muddies the waters - and really only to the benefit of the copyright industry.
In the comments to the article 'Daniel' points out that use of the term piracy is most probably because it's stigmatising meaning has taken root. ..and of course he's right. Talking about 'Piracy' is intended to imply that something bad is happening and the term can't be considered neutral or impartial.
Which set me thinking... we need a campaign to take back what is ours. Conservatives have conservatism. Liberals have liberalism, and Pirates have piracy. In a political context Pirates now means the pirate movement, and piracy by analogy properly ought to mean "following pirate ideology" - sharing culture, opposing intellectual monopolies and above all respect for civil and human rights (like privacy).
In which case... an observatory on 'piracy' would be a good thing... (We need more people looking out for our rights and principles)
Anyone care to sign up?
Enhancing the enforcement of intellectual property rights in the internal market
- which contains plans to set up an 'observatory' on counterfeiting and piracy.
It's an initiative that PP blogger Mikael Nilsson describes as "a comprehensive campaign to, together with the copyright industry, find the best methods to chase and brainwash the population"
Christian, who sits on JURI as part of his work at the EU parliament, took the chance at the meeting to point out that counterfeiting and piracy are not at all the same thing - and that piracy is is not a judicial term and they in fact mean copyright infringement.
He's only partly right since (maritime) piracy is defined in the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) of 1982 as "any criminal acts of violence, detention, or depredation committed for private ends by the crew or the passengers of a private ship or aircraft that is directed on the high seas against another ship, aircraft, or against persons or property on board a ship or aircraft." (It must be true... Wikipedia says so...). ..which begs the question what does that have to do with intellectual property and copyright?
Christian's point though is that lumping non-commercial file sharing, which Piratpartiet wants to legalise, with counterfeiting, which we don't, muddies the waters - and really only to the benefit of the copyright industry.
In the comments to the article 'Daniel' points out that use of the term piracy is most probably because it's stigmatising meaning has taken root. ..and of course he's right. Talking about 'Piracy' is intended to imply that something bad is happening and the term can't be considered neutral or impartial.
Which set me thinking... we need a campaign to take back what is ours. Conservatives have conservatism. Liberals have liberalism, and Pirates have piracy. In a political context Pirates now means the pirate movement, and piracy by analogy properly ought to mean "following pirate ideology" - sharing culture, opposing intellectual monopolies and above all respect for civil and human rights (like privacy).
In which case... an observatory on 'piracy' would be a good thing... (We need more people looking out for our rights and principles)
Anyone care to sign up?
Immigrant abuse: Uncle Sam, shame on you
If you were living in a police state you might expect at anytime that knock on the door in the dead of night.. and to be dragged off without warning and without charge.. But you live in a democracy right? ...and we have the forces of the law to defend and protect our basic rights.
Not it seems if you live in the US.
Steve Lendman has a long and disturbing entry on how US Immigration and Customs Enforcement ( ICE ) - part of the Department of Homeland Security - are routinely using police state tactics to detain immigrants in violation of their rights. (It's that fourth amendment again)
Quoting from a report on how the raids are conducted...
"..a team of heavily armed ICE agents approaching a private residence in the pre-dawn hours, purportedly seeking an individual believed to have committed some civil immigration violation. Agents, armed only with administrative warrants, which do not grant them legal authority to enter private dwellings, then push their way in when residents answer the door, enter through unlocked doors or windows or, in some cases, physically break into homes.
All occupants are then seized and interrogated with no legal authority, and often "no target is apprehended..."
York City Cardozo School of Law Immigration Justice Clinic (IJC)
Around 320 000 are put into detention each year highlighting the scale that this abuse can encompass - and yes, they may be illegal immigrants, but as this video explains - they have rights too....
Not it seems if you live in the US.
Steve Lendman has a long and disturbing entry on how US Immigration and Customs Enforcement ( ICE ) - part of the Department of Homeland Security - are routinely using police state tactics to detain immigrants in violation of their rights. (It's that fourth amendment again)
Quoting from a report on how the raids are conducted...
"..a team of heavily armed ICE agents approaching a private residence in the pre-dawn hours, purportedly seeking an individual believed to have committed some civil immigration violation. Agents, armed only with administrative warrants, which do not grant them legal authority to enter private dwellings, then push their way in when residents answer the door, enter through unlocked doors or windows or, in some cases, physically break into homes.
All occupants are then seized and interrogated with no legal authority, and often "no target is apprehended..."
York City Cardozo School of Law Immigration Justice Clinic (IJC)
Around 320 000 are put into detention each year highlighting the scale that this abuse can encompass - and yes, they may be illegal immigrants, but as this video explains - they have rights too....
Monday, 5 October 2009
Hot air on Global Warming
Cabalamat's Britblog roundup tipped me off to one of those storm in a tea-cup debates on Global Warming... Steve McIntyre, a long term climate sceptic, has made analysis of tree ring data used as a basis for claiming significant temperature rise in modern times.. and concludes that by substituting other tree ring data the apparent rise disappears.
I don't have the statistics or knowledge of dendrochronology to know whether his analysis is accurate or pertinent. Whether it is evidence of a 'global warming hoax' I very much doubt (by which I mean whether the results have been skewed deliberately to mislead)- but if this genuinely shows problems in the previous data or analysis it is a valuable contribution to the debate.
Reading Keith Briffa's response to the post you could almost wonder though if it isn't McIntyre that's guilty of selecting the data to exclude to substantiate his scepticism. Briffa promises a more detailed review of McIntyre's analysis. In the meantime RealClimate's response puts the argument into perspective by showing a range of other indicators of long term climate all with the same trend - none of them reliant on the Yamal peninsular tree-ring data.
Getting down to hard facts is important and not easy to do. Nobody wins and nobody loses by establishing the truth... which is why it's a little sad to see the climosceptic crowing that accompanies this type of report. If someone categorically proves that there is no global warming we will all be able to celebrate... but don't you think it's time we all started thinking about plan B?
I don't have the statistics or knowledge of dendrochronology to know whether his analysis is accurate or pertinent. Whether it is evidence of a 'global warming hoax' I very much doubt (by which I mean whether the results have been skewed deliberately to mislead)- but if this genuinely shows problems in the previous data or analysis it is a valuable contribution to the debate.
Reading Keith Briffa's response to the post you could almost wonder though if it isn't McIntyre that's guilty of selecting the data to exclude to substantiate his scepticism. Briffa promises a more detailed review of McIntyre's analysis. In the meantime RealClimate's response puts the argument into perspective by showing a range of other indicators of long term climate all with the same trend - none of them reliant on the Yamal peninsular tree-ring data.
Getting down to hard facts is important and not easy to do. Nobody wins and nobody loses by establishing the truth... which is why it's a little sad to see the climosceptic crowing that accompanies this type of report. If someone categorically proves that there is no global warming we will all be able to celebrate... but don't you think it's time we all started thinking about plan B?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
